WHC Sessions www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / WHC Sessions /

2011 WHC

Page  Page 3 of 8:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next »  
Author Durian
Registered
#31 | Posted: 24 Jun 2011 20:05 | Edited by: Durian 
Time to Africa for new nomination site! Senegal's Saloum Delta is inscribed as a cultural WHS. So this year we have 3 new natural WHS, WHC accepted IUCN report with no change again.

Author Durian
Registered
#32 | Posted: 24 Jun 2011 20:21 
UPDATED official withdrawal

Israel - The Land of Caves and Hiding
Mexico - Fundidora Monterre 
Nigeria - Oke-Idanre Cultural Landscape 
Saudi Arabia - Historical City of Jeddah
Turkey - Old City and Ramparts of Alanya with Seljuk Shipyard 

Author Solivagant
Registered
#33 | Posted: 25 Jun 2011 04:08 | Edited by: Solivagant 
It is likely that Jamaica's "Blue and John Crow Mountains" nomination is going to be deferred today (I keep but a faint hope of an "Inscription" this year to add to my "visited list"!!)

Herewith a video from Jamaica's morning TV show which provides an indication of how the nomination is presented to the people of that country! Not entirely factually correct -but that is par for the course whenever/wherever WHS matters are "explained" in the media. It also shows how relatively "important" such nominations are to countries like Jamaica.

http://www.televisionjamaica.com/vd-10497-BLUEJOHNCROWMTSFORWORLDHERITAGELIST.aspx

Author Solivagant
Registered
#34 | Posted: 25 Jun 2011 04:31 | Edited by: Solivagant 
We talked above of the "spin" which countries apply to the news of failure to get their nominations inscribed. So Jeddah wasn't "rejected" - it was "withdrawn" to enable the ravages wrought by heavy rains to be repaired!!

Another one from India.
Western Ghats was "referred" - this is presented in The Hindu as a major triumph (and perhaps, given the track record of many Indian sites aspiring for inscription, it is!!) - "The serial sites of Western Ghats will be inscribed in the World Heritage List next year". That assumes of course that India will be able to cover the requirements leading to the "Referral" in time for next year - it will be interesting to see if this IS the case as "referral" wasn't IUCN's preferred decision!! The whole way in which the decision is presented is of course incorrect but, at least, a "Referral" rather than a "Deferral" means that IUCN inspectors won't be turning up again to be imprisoned by angry peasants (No mention at all of this Karnataka issue!)

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article2132604.ece

(Later - a more realistic report from India of what happened to the Ghats nomination -
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/171683/no-heritage-tag-w-ghats.html )

Author Khuft
Registered
#35 | Posted: 25 Jun 2011 06:35 | Edited by: Khuft 
According to this website, the German Beech forests were inscribed too (as extension to the Slovak & Ukrainian ones). Can anyone confirm?

http://www.handelsblatt.com/lifestyle/kultur-literatur/das-sind-deutschlands-wahrzeic hen/4320240.html#image

Interestingly, they were supposed to be Deferred (according to the other thread on this forum) - so this would be the first site this year where the WHC has "overruled" the advisory bodies...

Author elsslots
Admin
#36 | Posted: 25 Jun 2011 06:40 
yes they have been

see http://twitter.com/#!/unescoheritage

wadi rum also is in, against the odds of the AB's

Author Durian
Registered
#37 | Posted: 25 Jun 2011 07:39 | Edited by: Durian 
elsslots:
Interestingly, they were supposed to be Deferred (according to the other thread on this forum) - so this would be the first site this year where the WHC has "overruled" the advisory bodies...


Interesting that WHC overruled IUCN report, it rarely happened! normally WHC did with ICOMOS one, however I love the result as I visited Hainich National Park at Eisenach (very near Wartburg Castle), part of German nomination. And from the German news, the sites is now called "Primeval Beech Forests of the Carpathians and the Old Beech Forests in Germany"

Author Assif
Registered
#38 | Posted: 25 Jun 2011 16:03 | Edited by: Assif 
I don't see Wadi Rum on the official website where all others do appear. It seems it was after all deferred/referred.

Author Solivagant
Registered
#39 | Posted: 25 Jun 2011 16:07 | Edited by: Solivagant 
Thailand's choreographed "denunciation" (i.e Leaving/"Walking out") of the World Heritage Convention was predicted this morning. Herewith a Thai and a Cambodian take on the upcoming event


http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/243998/government-to-pull-out-of-whc

http://khmerization.blogspot.com/2011/06/thailand-threatens-to-quit-world.html

See Article 35 of the Convention
http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext

Author Assif
Registered
#40 | Posted: 25 Jun 2011 20:20 | Edited by: Assif 
Colombia´s Coffee Plantations are in!

Author Durian
Registered
#41 | Posted: 25 Jun 2011 20:33 
Els

I understand that Hiraizumi's Yanaginogosho Isek, site of government offices is excluded as per ICOMOS recommendation, so Hiraizumi page need to be updated.

Author elsslots
Admin
#42 | Posted: 26 Jun 2011 00:33 
Assif:
I don't see Wadi Rum on the official website where all others do appear

It is in. They're just slow in updating the website.
And their twitter-page too: Meroe, The Longobards and Fagus Factory have been inscribed yesterday too.

Author Solivagant
Registered
#43 | Posted: 26 Jun 2011 02:40 | Edited by: Solivagant 
I note that they are having a "day off" today - I don't know if that is normal? I seem to remember that there is usually a "trip out" at some time to see a WHS of the host country - possibly won't happen in Paris and the delegates will have to find something else to do in that city?

This is the longest WHC for the last few years at least. Including first and last days -
2005 Durban 8 days
2006 Vilnius 8 days
2007 Ch'chch 10 days (a long way to fly for almost everybody)
2008 Quebec 9 days
2009 Seville 9 days
2010 Brasilia 10 days
2011 Paris 11 days

There is more and more to discuss of course regarding the existing sites. Regarding new inscriptions the numbers have been limited compared with many years ago but have remained much the same during the above period.

I got the feeling yesterday of a "disputatious" Committee. As has been said above it is unusual for them to go against IUCN recommendations but here they were going against both IUCN AND ICOMOS. Later yesterday it seemed that almost anything would have got inscribed - were they getting tired or was it perhaps "shock" after Thailand's exit? Or did ICOMOS just "give up" putting its case. If Jamaica's Blue mountains had been discussed as late as Columbia's Coffee area it might have got in!! I am currently considering a trip to Columbia so have been following that nomination with interest. Although I don't agree with a lot of rather esoteric and even nit-picking criticisms made by ICOMOS in many nominations, the Columbian one did seem rather lacking in focus and precision to me. I look forward to reading the nomination file to find out where the boundaries are so I could plan to visit it -though what exactly there is to see which is so special compared with other coffee growing areas I am still not really sure.

Regarding Thailand's exit from the Convention -it may of course be a bit of "Theatre" which will be rescinded over the next 12 months before the pull-out takes effect but, if it does go ahead I wonder where that leaves Thailand's existing WHS?
When UK put UNESCO "on report" earlier this year and said it would withhold payments to UNESCO if there was no improvement within the organisation and the results it obtained for all the money it spent, this same issue was raised in UK. Of course there are differences between witholding money from UNESCO and actually "Denunciating" the WH Convention -but, in the UK's case, it was stated that existing sites would remain on the list whilst no more could be added.

Author elsslots
Admin
#44 | Posted: 26 Jun 2011 03:43 
For those of you that are interested in reading a bit more, here you can find the nomination file of Ogasawara.

Author Khuft
Registered
#45 | Posted: 26 Jun 2011 10:59 
Let's see what really happens with Thailand's membership. Maybe they'll just be sulking in a corner and ignore WHC for a few years until a new - less paranoid - government comes to power. Maybe a bit like the US, who ignored UNESCO for years (while never formally leaving the WH Convention) and ultimately came back.

In terms of what would happen to the Thai sites if Thailand left, I guess that would be awkward, but not totally unprecedented.

E.g. Kotor in Montenegro was in a similar situation for some time (between the date when Montenegro seceded and when it ratified the WH Convention); also the sites in Kosovo are somewhat in limbo too (though many countries still consider them to officially lie within Serbia).

Jerusalem is another such conundrum...

Page  Page 3 of 8:  « Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next » 
WHC Sessions www.worldheritagesite.org Forum / WHC Sessions / 2011 WHC Top
This topic is closed. New replies are not allowed.
 
 
  www.worldheritagesite.org Forum Powered by Chat Forum Software miniBB ®